Who needs sticks of butter and lard when you have wooly mammoth suet?
And The Bear is not my hero. He is an interesting example of someone who lived a very healthy life despite the physical rigors of partying like a fool for decades with the Dead. He did it on an all meat diet. Some of the things he says make sense and some are total bunk (e.g. don't eat any salt).
Last edited by Paleobird; 05-03-2013 at 10:49 PM.
I do like these old paper's, the good old days when scientists were really true to the search for knowledge.
Some interesting points from the paper.
1/ The respiratory quotients mentioned in the fasting period, 0.64, 0.60 & 0.71 perfectly matches the respiratory quotient for fat metabolism, hence there was no or absolute minimum carbohydrate metabolism occuring during this period.
2/ There was no or minimal nitrogen compounds in their urine, an indicator that minimal amounts of protein were being broken down for gluconeogenesis.
3/ Extrordinarily low levels of Ketone bodies were detected on their breath or in their urine, now if I'm not mistaken this is the case for individuals who are well adapted to a ketogenic diet, significant ketone bodies are only detected in the breath and urine when one is in the process of adapting and excess ketone bodies are disposed of that way until the rest of the body fully adapts.
4/ Glucose tolerance at the end of fasting was markedly reduced, therefore these individuals bodies were in ketosis and their bodies were now tuned to minimal glucose, hence needed time to switch back.
5/ Glucose tolerence was excellent (better than normal subjects) at the beginning of the study, indicating to me they were probably in a low carb diet state, borderline ketosis and were actively using dietary glucose, this is confirmed by the diet breakdown of 54g carbohydrate.
6/ Non protein nitrogen content of blood (Urea) same as other races, this factor indicates that in their normal diet there was minimal gluconeogenesis occuring from the breakdown of protein.
These points suggest to me the contrary, that the individuals in the study were actually highly adapted to a Ketogenic diet. In warmer times their protein intake did look far to high at around 60% of macro's and point 6 seems to contradict this figure, I do question that as they were fully aware of "Rabbit Starvation", we also must remember those macro's were quoted from a different source and weren't specific to these subjects. Nevertheless in colder weather and when travelling fat intake was much higher and in these times they undoubtably would have been in a ketogenic state.
Still a great paper, will go back and have another read.
Last edited by Omni; 05-04-2013 at 03:55 AM.
At the end of the last round I began serious free weight training (evolving through 4-hour body-ish to Starting strength-ish to 5-3-1 [present]. That made it impossible to maintain the 210 weight.
The realization, encouraged by the HCG maintenance information I had, that I had to change how and what I eat led me to Tim Ferris, and then, here.
Present weight: 225
Current calories per day (eating --80-90% paleo) when hungry: 2500-3500--I think my metabolism is OK.
I'm pretty happy with HCG, but, there is lots of bad advice and misinformation about it on line. No one should do it without a doc who "gets it" and encourages real food/primal change for maintenance.
I also think I might have gotten the same results If I'd understood paleo (like information here) better at the time. However, the HCG diet gave me a way to ditch grains for 3-4 weeks --broke the addiction. I decided to make that permanent. Most don't -- and they fail to keep the weight loss.
I had a girlfriend who did it (as I would guess most people do) on her own, without a doctor's help. She's pretty depressed about how it turned out. Of course she ended up gaining back more weight than she lost.
I should get approx 2800 cals/day to maintain weight
2200 would help me lose weight at a steady, safe rate
1400 would be 'extreme'
...or, are you talking about even less of a difference?
Sorry to ask what are probably already known questions on the ins and outs of IF, I am just literally a total noob.
People seem to do bad on longer IF fasts like Warrior (20/4) or Every Other Day (36/12) fasts where the eating window usually cannot make up for the amount of fasted time. Add to that eating tons of low calorie foods like veggies and lean meats and avoiding carbs, that will usually end in disaster.
I'm attempting to slowly ease into IF as PK describes it in the 3 part series. Half hour a week until you get there.
Havnt read pk's series. Warrior diet is one meal a day and unless you have a great stomach capacity, good luck.
I prefer to think of them as more of a holy trinity...since they for all intents and purposes cured my health woes entirely. I think it's fine to be addicted to sugar and not be able to miss a meal (as you recently stated you had trouble doing) since we live in a world where sugar is on tap, anyway. As long as you're okay with all the eventual negative health consequences, you can enjoy feeling amazing now for the trade-off of frailty and decay in old age. It's a personal choice. I'd rather feel amazing now on high-fat and keep feeling amazing into old age...
Warrior works fine for almost anybody on high-fat. Whether one meal or a few hours' eating time, it's not hard to get enough calories into you with high-fat food.
Steak, eggs, potatoes - fruits, nuts, berries and forage. Coconut milk and potent herbs and spices. Tea instead of coffee now and teeny amounts of kelp daily. Let's see how this does! Not really had dairy much, and gut seems better for it.